Analysis of physical requirements for simple three-qubit and nine-qubit quantum error correction on quantum-dot and superconductor qubits
IlKwon Sohn, Seigo Tarucha, Byung-Soo Choi
DOI 10.1103/PhysRevA.95.012306 · Physical Review A
Active bibliographic source — not scientific approval
Bibliographic access preserves source history; it does not approve extracted materials or validate reported claims. Review warnings on each occurrence separately.
Abstract
The implementation of a scalable quantum computer requires quantum error correction (QEC). An important step toward this goal is to demonstrate the effectiveness of QEC where the fidelity of an encoded qubit is higher than that of the physical qubits. Therefore, it is important to know the conditions under which QEC code is effective. In this study, we analyze the simple three-qubit and nine-qubit QEC codes for quantum-dot and superconductor qubit implementations. First, we carefully analyze QEC codes and find the specific range of memory time to show the effectiveness of QEC and the best QEC cycle time. Second, we run a detailed error simulation of the chosen error-correction codes in the amplitude damping channel and confirm that the simulation data agreed well with the theoretically predicted accuracy and minimum QEC cycle time. We also realize that since the swap gate worked rapidly on the quantum-dot qubit, it did not affect the performance in terms of the spatial layout.
Similar papers
Simulation of the five-qubit quantum error correction code on superconducting qubits
similarity 0.93I. A. Simakov et al.
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Simplified quantum error detection and correction for superconducting qubits
similarity 0.90Kyle Keane & Alexander N. Korotkov
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Creation of quantum error correcting codes in the ultrastrong coupling regime
similarity 0.89T. H. Kyaw et al. · 2014 · arXiv:1409.7308
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Dissipation-induced continuous quantum error correction for superconducting circuits
similarity 0.89Joachim Cohen & Mazyar Mirrahimi
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Simple quantum error detection and correction for superconducting qubits
similarity 0.88Kyle Keane & Alexander N. Korotkov · 2012 · arXiv:1205.1836
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
State preservation by repetitive error detection in a superconducting quantum circuit
similarity 0.88J. Kelly et al. · 2014 · arXiv:1411.7403
Source status unknown — claims are unverified